A blog published by the University of North Carolina School of Journalism reported recently that Steve Cohen of hedge fund SAC Capital managed to kill a story by Reuters reporter Matt Goldstein. It seems that Goldstein was going to shed some light on allegations that Cohen engaged in insider trading. Cohen didn’t like that, and got in touch with Goldstein’s superiors.

It remains unclear how Cohen convinced Goldstein’s superiors to shelve their journalistic ethics, but it is not surprising that he succeeded. After all, Cohen is “the most powerful trader on the Street.” He is also part of a network of closely affiliated hedge fund managers that for many years all but dictated much of what was published by the New York financial press.

Three years ago, while working for the Columbia Journalism Review, a magazine affiliated with Columbia University’s school of journalism in New York, I began investigating this network of hedge funds. I worked for many months on this story, and compiled evidence that the hedge fund managers, including Steve Cohen, had developed extremely odd relationships with small number of dishonest journalists.

This evidence gradually convinced me that the hedge funds and journalists not only routinely worked together to disseminate false information about public companies, but also set out to cover up the serious crime of market manipulation via naked short selling.

As I was preparing to publish this story, a hedge fund called Kingsford Capital donated a large sum of money to the Columbia Journalism Review. Indeed, it was made clear to me that my salary would be paid directly from Kingsford’s donation.

I have made this abundantly clear in various stories that I have since written for Deep Capture, but new evidence confirms that Kingsford is tied directly to Steve Cohen’s network of hedge funds and shady journalists – that is, the very network that I was planning to expose in the Columbia Journalism Review when Kingsford announced that it would henceforth be paying my salary.

I left the Columbia Journalism Review soon after Kingsford announced its “donation.” It is possible that my editors would have done the right thing and published my story had I remained. However, I have no doubt that Kingsford Capital’s “donation” stemmed not from some newfound dedication to the field of media criticism, but was intended as a means of acquiring leverage over the Columbia Journalism Review.

Moreover, new information suggests that Kingsford’s financial inducements might have persuaded other journalists to cover up short seller crimes.

This is a scandal of rather significant proportions, so let’s review the evidence, old and new.

While at Columbia, a key focus of my investigation was a financial research shop called Gradient Analytics. Former Gradient employees had testified under oath that short selling hedge funds – especially Steve Cohen’s SAC Capital and Rocker Partners – wrote and traded ahead of Gradient’s false, negative reports on public companies. Former employees of Gradient also said that journalist Herb Greenberg, then of CNBC and MarketWatch.com, timed his false, negative stories, which were based on Gradient research, so that Rocker could profit from the effect those stories had on stock prices.

In the course of investigating SAC Capital and Rocker, I was taking a close look at the bear raid on a company called Fairfax Financial (NYSE:FFH). As we have since shown in numerous Deep Capture reports, Rocker, SAC Capital and a few closely affiliated hedge funds – including Jim Chanos’s Kynikos Capital, and Dan Loeb’s Third Point Capital – conspired to destroy Fairfax. As part of this ultimately unsuccessful attack, the hedge funds attempted to cut off Fairfax’s access to credit. They traded ahead of false financial research that had been written with their cooperation. And they hired a thug named Spyro Contogouris to harass and threaten Fairfax executives.

Emails obtained from discovery in a lawsuit filed by Fairfax Financial (NYSE:FFH) show that Kingsford Capital, the hedge fund that donated money to pay my salary at the Columbia, is directly tied to Steve Cohen, Rocker Partners and the other hedge funds that were attacking Fairfax at the time of my investigation. In one email, from Kingsford manager David Scially to Rocker Partners employee Russell Lyne, the subject line reads: “http://www.spyrocontogouris.com” – a reference to the website of the above-mentioned thug, Spyro Contogouris. The contents of the email is redacted, so it is difficult to know what was discussed, but it is safe to assume that Kingsford and Rocker were communicating about the attack on Fairfax.

It has also come to my attention that Kingsford Capital at one time employed the above-mentioned thug, Spyro Contogouris. Two weeks after Kingsford agreed to “donate” money to the Columbia Journalism Review, the FBI arrested Contogouris as part of an investigation into this same network of hedge funds.

Another target of my investigation was TheStreet.com (NASDAQ:TSCM). Although some good journalists work for that publication, a review of hundreds of stories and numerous bear raids made it clear to me that TheStreet.com had been founded partly to serve the financial interests of select short selling hedge funds, including Rocker Partners, which was then TheStreet.com’s largest shareholder (apart from founder Jim Cramer). Over the course of my investigation, I closely examined the journalism of TheStreet.com’s five founding editors. It was clear that these five journalists had routinely disseminated false information that served the interests of their short selling sources, including Rocker Partners and SAC Capital.

Four of the five founding editors of TheStreet.com were as follows:

1) Jim Cramer, famously of CNBC;

2) David Kansas, then of the Wall Street Journal;

3) Herb Greenberg, the CNBC and MarketWatch reporter mentioned above, said to be conspiring with Rocker and Gradient Analytics;

4) Jon Markman, then running a hedge fund out of the offices of the above mentioned Gradient Analytics. (Markman has since gone on the record saying that hedge funds pay journalists to write false stories.)

The fifth founding editor of TheStreet.com was Cory Johnson. In 2006, Cory Johnson was a manager of Kingsford Capital, the hedge fund that donated money to pay my salary at the Columbia Journalism Review, right before I was to publish a story exposing the five founding editors of TheStreet.com and the hedge funds in their network. After I published my first Deep Capture story raising questions about Kingsford’s donation to the Columbia Journalism Review, Johnson removed all references to Kingsford from his online profiles at LinkedIn.com and other social networking sights.

Another focus of my investigation at Columbia was a hedge fund manager named Jim Carruthers. Patrick Byrne, in his capacity as CEO of Overstock.com, had recently sued Rocker Partners and given a famous conference call presentation in which he described the shenanigans of Rocker and affiliated hedge funds. During this presentation, Patrick stated that he had been informed that Carruthers had been posing as a private investigator as part of the network’s efforts to smear public companies. An email obtained in the Fairfax discovery, written by an employee of the above-mentioned Third Point Capital, and addressed to the above-mentioned Dan Loeb, states: “Jim Carruthers (ex Eastbourne partner, Scially friend, etc.) would like to come up and meet with you…It would be well worth your time.” In other words, Scially, the Kingsford Capital manager, was on good terms with both Carruthers and Loeb, at the time that Kingsford announced that it would be paying the salary of the journalist (me) who was seeking to expose Carruthers, Loeb, and the rest of their network.

Deep Capture reporter Judd Bagley has obtained a list of people whom Kingsford Capital manager David Scially invited to be his “friends” on Facebook, the social networking site. Among Scially’s Facebook friends were Rocker Partners’ managing partner, and three of this managing partners’ family members. Several bloggers, such as Gary Weiss (more on him below), have written that Judd’s Facebook list is a Nixonesque “enemies list” dreamed up by Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, when in fact Byrne was not involved in its creation, most of the people on the list have nothing whatsoever to do with Overstock.com, and it was not “dreamed up”, but merely documents cold facts (bilateral Facebook friendships) that are in fact public. When considered alongside the emails and other evidence, the Facebook revelation is excellent evidence that Scially is close to Rocker Partners – close enough to invite the managing partner and much of his family to be his internet pals. That is big news – a clear motive for Kingsford Capital to begin paying my salary right before I was going to publish strong evidence that Rocker Partners and others in its network were dirty players.

Scially’s Facebook friends also include the above-mentioned Dan Loeb, accused of conspiring with Rocker Partners in the attack on Fairfax; David Einhorn, a hedge fund manager whom I was investigating because he consistently attacks public companies in cahoots with Loeb and others in the network; and Dan Colarusso, a journalist I was investigating because he had vowed to use “barrels of ink” to “crush” Patrick Byrne, who was famously crusading against naked short sellers and this same network of miscreant hedge fund managers. (Patrick is now a Deep Capture reporter.) This additional Facebook information is clear evidence that Kingsford Capital is part of the network I was investigating when Kingsford Capital “donated” money to the Columbia Journalism Review.

Another target of my investigation at CJR was a journalist named Gary Weiss. Weiss, a former reporter for BusinessWeek magazine is flat-out corrupt. It is a disgrace to the profession of journalism that he is still working. While at BusinessWeek, he published stories fed to him by Kingsford Capital while deliberately covering up illegal naked short selling by Kingsford’s then business partner. Since then, Weiss has been caught anonymously authoring blogs that spew lies about people he considers to be his enemies. He has been caught anonymously authoring blogs in which he effusively praises himself — Gary Weiss. He has denied that he authored the blogs about himself despite all evidence to the contrary. He was caught shilling for the Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. (an outfit at the center of the naked short selling scandal) while posing as a journalist. He was caught lying about his shilling. He was caught lying and denying when he was caught controlling the Wikipedia entry on naked short selling. He has lied repeatedly in his blogs about Deep Capture reporters Patrick Byrne and Judd Bagley. He has lied about me – for example, stating that I was fired from the Columbia Journalism Review. He has continued to lie and cover up the crime of naked short selling. He has lied and covered up crimes committed by people tied to the Mafia. And the common denominator of all this lying has been to boost the profits of short selling hedge fund managers, such as his pals at Kingsford Capital, which “donated” a lot money to the Columbia Journalism Review shortly before I was going to publish a story exposing Gary Weiss and his hedge fund friends. (For complete evidence of Gary Weiss’s lying, and his ties to Kingsford Capital, please search through Deep Capture’s archives. We have published extensively on the subject).

Another target of my investigation at CJR was a hedge fund manager named Manuel Asensio, who is tied closely to Gary Weiss. Asensio previously worked for First Hanover, a brokerage tied to the Mafia. He is a self-confessed naked short seller and has been fined for naked short selling infractions. He was also once a business partner of Kingsford Capital. That is to say, Kingsford and Asensio contractually agreed to attack public companies together. I think it’s safe to say that Asensio was close to Kingsford Capital at the time that Kingsford Capital delivered a bundle of money the Columbia Journalism Review.

Another focus of my investigation at CJR was the appalling bear raid on a collectibles company called Escala (NASDAQ:ESCL). Not only was Escala the victim of massive amounts of illegal naked short selling, but a hedge fund convinced the Spanish government that Escala’s parent company, based in Madrid, was fleecing investors in philatelic collectibles. The Spanish government closed the parent company, Afinsa, but not a single executive of the company has since been prosecuted for any crime. Former clients of Afinsa are now petitioning the Spanish government, claiming that the closure was a gross miscarriage of justice. For the full story, I encourage you to visit a website (www.gregmanning.me) put together by Escala’s former CEO. This website provides evidence that the hedge fund at the center of the bear raid on Escala – the hedge fund behind the Spanish government’s decision to close Afinsa — was none other than Kingsford Capital, which donated a bundle of money to the Columbia Journalism Review while I was busy trying to figure out which hedge fund was at the center of the bear raid on Escala.

While I was working on my story for the Columbia Journalism Review, a reporter named Justin Hibbard was working on a similar story for BusinessWeek magazine. I have reviewed emails between Hibbard and one of his sources. These emails clearly show that Hibbard had received evidence that various companies had been clobbered by illegal naked short selling. The emails suggest that Hibbard was investigating ties between journalists and naked short sellers, and that he had interviewed the above-mentioned Herb Greenberg. But for some reason, Hibbard’s story was killed. It never appeared in BusinessWeek. Shortly after Hibbard’s story was killed, Hibbard had a new job – working as consultant to Kingsford Capital.

After I wrote my first story raising questions about Kingsford’s “donation” to the Columbia Journalism Review, Hibbard erased all mention of Kingsford from his profiles on LinkedIn.com and other social networking sites. In a phone interview, Hibbard told me that he “preferred not to discuss” his relationship with Kingsford. When I asked what happened to his BusinessWeek story about naked short selling and corrupt journalists, he said that he had never worked on any such story. When I told him I had evidence to the contrary, he said he might have done some initial research on naked short selling, but he never finished the story. Currently, Hibbard works as a private investigator catering to the needs of short sellers and other “activist” investors. In an interview with an online publication, he said he serves hedge funds by “covertly” observing executives of public companies, taking photos of the executives with a spy camera, staking out offices, using multiple cars to trail the executives, etc. I assume Kingsford Capital is one of his clients.

My successor at the Columbia Journalism Review is now referred to as the “Kingsford Capital Fellow.” He has written several stories arguing that the above-mentioned Gradient Analytics is innocent, despite massive amounts of evidence to the contrary. He has written that short sellers are swell and good sources for journalists (glossing over the distinction between short selling and abusive short selling, just as a child molester would gloss over the distinction between sex and pedophilia). He has criticized a 60 Minutes television news expose on Gradient and Steve Cohen of SAC Capital. He has criticized Bloomberg News for writing that criminal naked short sellers helped take down Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. And he has portrayed the corrupt Gary Weiss as a respectable reporter. I don’t mean to suggest that the “Kingsford Capital Fellow” is dishonest, but I predict he will not write about journalists who have been corrupted by Kingsford Capital’s network of hedge fund managers.

To summarize, a particularly nasty network of hedge fund managers and criminals use underhanded tactics to influence the press. We have a money trail, multiple motives, and plenty of other reasons to believe that this network got to the Columbia Journalism Review, which is the only watchdog there is to keep the press honest.

How deep? More like how high. Capitol hill. The white house. We know the s.e.c. is bought and paid for. The d.o.j.??? The people in this country need to throw our present “government” in the cesspool of history. If we could accomplish that And KEEP A VERY CLOSE WATCH ON OUR EMPLOYEES THAT TAKE THEIR PLACE, WE MAY PRESERVE AMERICA. If not….

Who at the CJR or Business week,or any other of the media publications cooperates with the Hedgies to disclose who it is preparing to write what stories?Could it be the Editors of these publications? More than likely this is the source of the disclosures. If If 8-10 of the largest Publishers of Finanancial information is controled by the HFs by payoffs to its Editors,no worthwhile information on the nasty tactics of HFs will ever see the light of day.And Investors will continue to be in bewilderment as to where their money went.
We need more Mark Mitchell’s , Patrick Byrne’s and their associates.

It is interesting to NOTE that this PDF file is an image with no real text for search engines to pick up. This image file continues the standard of this website being virtually BLANK…

…not a good sign for the American People who want know what the Wall Street Criminals did that lead the world’s economies down a hole toward a total destruction of our economies last year.

ROOT CAUSE????
I am beginning to think that Former FED Chairman Alan Greenspan’s philosophy that FRAUD in the Banking Industry should NOT Be Regulated is the ROOT CAUSE of all the Criminal Activity we see on Wall Street.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is being sued over its failure to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests for information about what reforms, if any, it has undertaken since it failed to detect Bernard Madoff’s multibillion fraud.
The government watchdog Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington announced the lawsuit today, saying that the SEC has yet to reply to CREW’s October 2009 information request.
Read more »
PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)

Once again we have an article about crooks doing what crooks do, and everyone seems surprised or perhaps encouraged that the crooks are being exposed. This is a typical “dog bites man” story. When we finally, if ever, see an article that states “man bites dog”, THAT will be news. Just as our disgustingly corrupt, politically correct federal government refuses to protect its citizens from the known sources of physical terrorism, the supposed guardians of our collective financial freedom refuse to confront the known sources who attack our financial freedom. The US has rapidly become a “banana republic” albeit without the benefits of bananas or tropical weather. It’s been said that every man has his price. Unfortunately, too many in our government are the equivalent of 2 bit whores.

In this article we see hedge fund managers throwing cash around to help them achieve their financial goals. The Galleon (“Raj-Raj”) case recently had a theoreticl breakthrough as they allegedly caught “Raj-Raj” bribing with cash a “tipper” outside of the Wall Street community. In abusive short selling crimes we don’t see much cash used. The “currency” used is “order flow”. Hedge funds spend about $11 billion annually in fees and commissions associated with the directing of order flow. Abusive hege fund managers will naturally direct this “flow” to the abusive market makers, abusive prime brokers and abusive clearing firms most willing to break the laws needed to be broken to achieve the financial goals of the abusive hedge fund manager making his “2 and 20”. Unlike a cash bribe a hedge fund has the right to direct cash generating order flow to those they choose to do business with.

This has led to a “survival of the corruptest” form of natural selection on Wall Street driven by that $11 billion that everybody wants a piece of. Abusive MMs are probably the easiest to entice as they are still hurting from when the markets went to “decimalization” and the spreads between the bid and the ask that they make their money off of became razor thin. It’s not too difficult to find a MM willing to illegally access the bona fide MM exemption from making “pre-borrows” or “locates” before making admittedly naked short sales. Nor is it very difficult to find an abusive clearing firm willing to enter into illegal “ex-clearing arrangements” in order to hide delivery failures.

What really addresses the level of corruptness of our current markets, regulators and SROs is the refusal to “buy-in” the archaic delivery failures hidden all over Wall Street. This is the only way that those that paid for securities will once and for all get delivery of that which they paid for. What argument could these crooks possibly proffer to argue that this is not the proper course to take? The bill for a forced “buy-in” will land directly in the lap of the guilty party that is refusing to deliver that which he sold. This “bill” will be relatively small for those that have only slightly misbehaved and relatively large for those that have violently misbehaved. Buy-ins have proportionality plus they act like a heat-seeking missile to locate the guilty party. What could be more of a “no-brainer” to address these thefts?

The natural selection process on Wall Street could be instantly converted to “survival of the most honest”. If these delivery failures do no exist as the DTCC argues then the buy-in exercise will be a non-event but the currently anemic investor confidence will skyrocket and Wall Street will be swamped with business. The question that one has to ask is why have none of the laws we’ve written and rewritten over the last 15 years in regards to abusive short selling addressed the obvious need to buy-in all of the pre-existing delivery failures currently poisoning the share structures of U.S. corporations so that the purchasers of shares can finally receive that which they paid for. The answer has to do with the political power of the financial behemoth “banksters” and unregulated hedge funds currently sitting on these delivery failures.

fyi
Exclusive: Ex-SAC analyst caught up in Blackstone insider probe
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Add another name to the list of former staffers at Steven Cohen’s $13 billion hedge fund SAC Capital Advisors to draw scrutiny in a federal investigation into insider trading on Wall Street….http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6064W420100107

Actually, I take that comment back…
The documents on file DO seem to indicate quite a bit of collusion..

Still, maybe you could address the charges against Escala and its parent in your next post – charges of money-laundering and bad accounting, for example. Why did Lloyd’s withdraw its coverage? They couldn’t have done that solely because of the negative reports generated by the hedge funds, could they?

And what about the allegations that there was a substantial percentage of frauds among the supposedly valuable stamps.

Could this have been a case where there was both fraud AND abusive short-selling?

I am one of the 190,000 Afinsa customers. For those of you who think that the activity of this company was a Ponzi pyramid scheme, allow me to say, with all due respect, that you have no clue what you are talking about, unless you also consider Stanley Gibbons business, in the U.K. another Ponzi scheme. They operate exactly the same as Afinsa did.

Our Government has ruined us, 190.000 clients, and has shut down a profitable and legal company by who knows what strange conspiracy which was carefully planned by a few within a perverse triangle: USA, Britain and Spain. Who has benefited from this macro spoliation? Someday we’ll know.

And as that day comes, we will go to the European authorities in Brussels in demand of help.

Mila Hernan.
President of A.C.LA. (Asociation Against the Liquidation of Afinsa)

all one need do to see how captured the “columbia journalism review” is is to view their list of staff writers on their about us webpage. there you will see as blantant as it is a major funder backed writer: Dean Starkman (Kingsford Capital Fellow).http://www.cjr.org/about_us/masthead.php

A fellow I work with had a very interesting observation that he expressed to myself this morning,he stated that there is no conspiracy theories anymore because the crooks have captured most of our political process and could care less about who knows what,these wall street gangsters are now in our face thumbing the rule of law because they own the law now,this guy has no idea how true an observation he has of our current state of affairs.

Jim,we must continue the fight against all corruption where ever we find it while we still can because when good men and women do nothing evil triumphs,if we go down at least we’ll have clean hands and a clean conscience.The big picture is bleak but I think that it’s part of the psychological programing the crooks want to promote, the attitude that says if we can’t beat them we might as well join them.Daniel wouldn’t bow down to the king when facing the lions den,soooo,we should also have that same spirit in us at this time in history.DOING THE RIGHT THING BECAUSE IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

here is a story for you on how contogouris’ case was dismissed in the SDNY.

you know the background since you covered it but here is the scoop.

In January of 2009 alleged gambino associate Julius Nasso who served one year in federal prison for attempting to extort money from his former partner Steven Seagal referred Contogouris to former prosecutor Douglas Grover of Thompson Hine law firm.

How does Nasso know Grover? How does Nasso know Contogouris?

Grover has been representing Nasso since early 2008 because he is the subject of an ongoing investigation into the Lowen’s Pharmacy steroid case in Brooklyn in which Dr. Richard Lucente is currently charged along with the son in law of Nasso’s late partner John Rossi, Ed Letendre.
Four deaths have resulted in direct connection with the steroids that came from Lowen’s.
And here come the feds…..
There is a grand jury in California investigating whether Nasso aiding in the smuggling and distribution of steroids through a company called DNP international based in California.
Nasso has been telling people that his investigator former DEA agent Bill McMullen has close ties to the FDA investigator on the DNP case and “fixed” it so that Nasso would not get dragged into it.

McMullen was the guy in the Pellicano seach warrant affadavit written by former FBI agent Stan Ornellas that helped the FBI get into Anthony Pellicano’s office.

Dan Loeb is definitely on the insider trading failboat. His fund’s performance is totally mediocre compared to that of smarter guys from whom he “steals” ideas (Einhorn, Cohen, etc), and he knows he’s mediocre too, which is why he relies heavily on whatever insider info he and his little cronies can pick up. Learned all this from a current frustrated employee there. Sleep tight, douchebags!

The unusual circumstances that led the U.S. market to rally powerfully in 2009 might be explained by secret government moves to buy stocks, according to Charles Biderman, the founder and chief executive of TrimTabs, a research firm that tracks liquidity flows in the market. “We cannot identify the source of the new money that pushed stock prices up so far so fast,” Biderman said in a statement Tuesday. The source of approximately $600 billion net new cash necessary to lift the market’s overall capitalization by $6 trillion last year could not be identified by TrimTabs, Biderman said. The money, he said, didn’t come from traditional players such as companies, retail investors, foreign investors, hedge funds or pension funds. “We know that the U.S. government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to support the auto industry, the housing market, and the banks and brokers. Why not support the stock market as well?” The Federal Reserve or the Treasury, Biderman said, could have easily manipulated the stock market by purchasing $60 to $70 billion worth of futures of the S&P 500 Index (SPX 1,140, -1.20, -0.11%) on a monthly basis. – WSJ MarketWatch

Dominant Social Theme: More conspiracy theories!

Free-Market Analysis: So now the whispers about government intervention into the world’s largest stock market have reached the point where the mainstream press is writing about them. Way back in 1987, during the Crash, it was common knowledge – or at least a common rumor – that Alan Greenspan had demanded that commercial banks buy stocks directly to help stabilize the market, and had provided funds for that purpose.

Read More …

Sorry, I will try to find the link,but I thought youse might like the content!!

Now lets connect our US Fed Rigs Stockmarket to the following and see what we may surmise..

Federal Reserve Seeks to Block Release of U.S. Bailout Secrets

David Glovin
Mon Jan 11, 12:01 am ET

Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) — The Federal Reserve will ask a U.S. appeals court to block a ruling that for the first time would force the central bank to reveal secret identities of financial firms that might have collapsed without the largest government bailout in U.S. history.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan, after hearing arguments in the case today, will decide whether the Fed must release records of the unprecedented $2 trillion U.S. loan program launched after the 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. In August, a federal judge ordered that the information be released, responding to a request by Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News.

As always you are spot on. I’d add that no one is forcing anything at this point until the ollie ollie in come free is stated. Given the damage that the financial system took and to the extent it occurred world wide. i’d submit that buyins have selectively been taking place. AIG is one example and on a different front WYNN.

So the question begs whose next? As for many going to jail. Don’t bet on it. The game of let’s fix it and as we do get the mouth pieces out there to say it never happened.

They try and make it sound like their conspiracy is all powerful, but the reality is there are a handful of fat frat boys from Connecticut that have made enough money to bribe some regulators, reporters and politicians.

They are small, weak and if I may say so, a bit dimwitted. I laugh at how this site exposes their Keystone Cops antics.

Kind of like the bootleggers of old, but you know what, right makes might and these criminals should be quaking in their boots, because Ma and Pa America are becoming angry.

There’s an old fashioned run on the banks happening in slow motion, as brokerage accounts and bank accounts are moved from “too big to fail” bailed out institutions to little local companies.

SEC accuses BofA of lying, then lets execs and lawyers off hook
The
SEC today announced that it’s adding another charge to its already
humbling complaint against Bank of America, but buried in its press
release announcing the charges the Wall Street watchdog also said it
won’t go after individuals it claims are responsible for these alleged
misdeeds.
That means that neither the executives calling the shots nor the
attorneys who crafted the allegedly misleading documents provided to
shareholders will be sued by the SEC.
That revelvation came as the SEC tacked on an additional claim that
BofA failed to tell shareholders about impending losses at Merrill
Lynch, which BofA acquired a year ago. The SEC has already accused the
bank of misleading shareholders about billions in bonuses it paid to
Merrill execs on the eve of the merger.
T he SEC’s decision with regard to BofA executives and lawyers is
likely to infuriate US District Court Judge Jed Rakoff, who is
overseeing the SEC’s case and last year took the unusual move of
refusing to accept the SEC’s $33 million settlement with the bank. One
of his concerns at the time was that no BofA executives who oversaw the
allegedly faulty disclosures were charged.

From the SEC’s press release: “According to the SEC’s proposed
complaint, Bank of America executives at various times discussed the
firm’s disclosure obligations with internal and external counsel. These
executives are not alleged to have deliberately concealed information
from counsel or otherwise acted with scienter or intent to mislead. Nor
is any counsel alleged to have acted with scienter or intent to
mislead. For these reasons, the SEC’s
proposed complaint does not seek charges against any individual
officers, directors or attorneys. SEC staff has advised the Commission
that, after a careful assessment of the evidence and all of the
relevant circumstances, it has determined that charges against
individuals for their roles in connection with proxy disclosure are not
appropriate[emphasis added]. ”
5:47 PM, January 11, 2010 ι KAJA WHITEHOUSE
The SEC today announced that it’s adding another charge to its already humbling complaint against Bank of America, but buried in its press release announcing the charges the Wall Street watchdog also said it won’t go after individuals it claims are responsible for these alleged misdeeds.

That means that neither the executives calling the shots nor the attorneys who crafted the allegedly misleading documents provided to shareholders will be sued by the SEC.

SEC to Name Investigative Chiefs Article Comments more in Text
By KARA SCANNELL
WASHINGTON—The Securities and Exchange Commission is set to name chiefs for five new specialized investigative units, advancing a key aspect of the agency’s effort to rebuild its enforcement program.

Enforcement Director Robert Khuzami is expected to announce the moves at a news conference Wednesday, along with the release of guidelines meant to encourage individuals to cooperate to earn credit for substantially aiding cases, people familiar with the matter say.

In his personnel choices, Mr. Khuzami tapped senior enforcement lawyers who have led offices or worked on significant cases over the years, these people said.

The five units identify high-priority areas for the agency. Daniel Hawke, head of the Philadelphia office, was selected to run the market abuse unit, which will focus on insider-trading and market-manipulation cases, people familiar with the matter said.

Kenneth Lench will run the structured and new-products unit, which will focus on derivatives and newly developed products, they said. Cheryl Scarboro will be named chief of the agency’s unit that investigates foreign bribery by corporations, the people familiar with the matter said.

Elaine Greenberg, a veteran of the Philadelphia office, has been tapped to run the municipal-securities unit. The unit specializing in asset managers, including hedge funds and private-equity firms, is set to be jointly run by Bruce Karpati, who has run the agency’s hedge-fund working group for the past several years, and Robert Kaplan, another SEC veteran.

Another unit, called market intelligence, will assume the responsibilities of the Internet enforcement unit and add new duties, such as handling tips and referrals.

It would see like some of Cohens goons got to the Former Mrs. Cohens lawyer and made him an offer he could’nt refuse huh? Just sayin..

“Is there something about matters surrounding Steve Cohen that causes tempers to flare?

Less than a month after the billionaire hedge-fund manager’s ex-wife, Patricia Cohen, made a splash alleging he cheated her of millions in their divorce 20 years ago, her lawyers are doing battle with each other.

Yesterday, the ex’s former attorney, Paul Batista, withdrew her suit against Cohen. A single line filed with Manhattan’s federal court says they “hereby dismiss this action without prejudice.”

The move infuriated the new lawyer, Gaytri Kachroo, who also represented Bernie Madoff whistleblower Harry Markopolos.

REUTERS
STEVE COHEN A suit that won’t go away.
“We are shocked by Mr. Batista’s actions,” Kachroo said. “He acted without our client’s approval and without providing notice to us, her attorneys. We continue to investigate the case and are looking to file an amended complaint on behalf of Ms. Cohen.”

SEC Seeks Ban on Unsupervised Access to Stock Market (Update1) Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A
By Nina Mehta and Jesse Westbrook

Jan. 13 (Bloomberg) — The Securities and Exchange Commission voted to propose banning a practice in which brokers provide investors with unsupervised access to a stock exchange or alternative trading system.

Chairman Mary Schapiro said so-called naked sponsored access, in which a customer bypasses the pre-trade controls of their brokers and access markets directly, may expose the market and firms that offer the service to too much risk.

“We are concerned that order-entry errors in this setting could suddenly and significantly make a broker dealer or other market participants financially vulnerable within mere minutes or seconds,” Schapiro said at a hearing in Washington today.

Commissioners are meeting in Washington today to begin formulating the next round of stock market regulation, focusing on strategies used by professional investors, such as sponsored access and “dark pool” trading venues. The agency voted 5-0 to approve the proposal.

sean,
Once the lobby gets hold of this/these proposals, that as far as they get…No, Notta, Zilch will be done. Proposals without teeth can surface as many times as it takes to make the appearance of reform but $$$$ insures they’ll never see the light of day as pockets are padded and lobbiest make behind closed doors deals and appearances.

“January 13, 2010 Goldman Sachs-AIG: It’s Likely Worse Than You Think By James Keller The Goldman Sachs-AIG scandal may be worse than we think. Former New York Fed President and current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is being castigated for paying off AIG’s counterparties – Goldman foremost among them – 100 cents on the dollar and then keeping these payments secret. But it seems likely that Goldman actually got much more than 100%. What is worse, Goldman may have received this windfall by trading on information that was deliberately withheld from the public. A brief recap of the Goldman-AIG story is necessary. Goldman has revealed that it had $20 billion in trades on with AIG, where it had bought protection on various toxic assets from AIG. Goldman believed this translated into $10 billion of risk to AIG, meaning that the mortgage assets might be worth as little as 50%. Against this $10 billion of AIG risk, Goldman had $7.5 billion in collateral from AIG. The rest of the risk, $2.5 billion, was hedged with Credit Default Swaps, whereby Goldman bought protection on AIG from a variety of highly rated banks. Goldman felt it was well-hedged, thus the repeated claim that it was not at risk if AIG defaulted .. Criticism of Geithner seems appropriate. Paying counterparties 100 cents on the dollar was unnecessary. Keeping the whole thing a secret was indefensible. Allowing windfall profits was unconscionable. But the Fed’s behavior may not be the worst element of this episode. Frankly, it is hard to see how, in having sold its AIG protection before March 2009, that Goldman Sachs can avoid the appearance that these trades were improper. Over a year on, we still await a clear explanation of how much the firm made from this protection and how its subsequent sale can be justified when Goldman had information that the federal government was deliberately keeping from the public. James Keller is a Contributing Editor at RealClearMarkets and can be reached at jwkellerjr@gmail.com “

This “borrow” is done unbeknownst to the investor that purchased the shares in question and amounts to probably the largest “conflict of interest” known to mankind. The question becomes would these investors knowingly loan, without compensation, their shares to those whose intent is to bankrupt their investment if they knew that the loan process was the key mechanism needed for the naked short sellers to effect their goal? Another question that arises is should the investor’s b/d who just earned a commission and therefore owes its client a fiduciary duty of care, be acting as the intermediary in this loan process keeping in mind that this b/d is being paid the cash value of the shares being loaned as a means of collateralizing the loan, all unbeknownst to his client the purchaser.

Those articles you cited I wrote a gazillion years ago when I was young and naive. Now that I’m old and naive I have to point out one errata on that margin a/c article. Technically the duty of cared owed by a b/d to his client does not rise to the level of a “fiduciary”. It actually resides at the level of an “agent” that took a commission. A “fiduciary” has to put the needs of his clients in front of his own. There is legislation in the works right now to increase a b/d’s duty to that of a “fiduciary” but if nobody is going to enforce the laws then it’s kind of a moot point. We’ll have to see how these 5 new SEC appointees work out especially the new “market manipulation” czar that I believe the “Deep Capture” crew is going to get to know quite well.

I some how see a quick round of ‘I did it but they made me do it’ that will end up pinning the blame on the small investor if they can.

How stupid do they think we are? Before they even start around the mullberry bush with this one I see where they will try to take it.

I hate to say this but we need to take a lesson from China. Traitors are those who use their political position for personal gain at the expense of those they are sworn to serve and should be charged and prosecuted as such.

Non-prosecution Agreements — Formal written agreements, entered into under limited and appropriate circumstances, in which the Commission agrees not to pursue an enforcement action against a cooperator if the individual or company agrees, among other things, to cooperate fully and truthfully and comply with express undertakings

Here is part of the 2010 version of how insane it is to use margin accounts.

WALL STREET VERSUS MAIN STREET AND THE USE OF MARGIN ACCOUNTS

Let’s assume “Buyer Bob B.” has $10,000 to invest and he wants to buy shares of Acme Pharmaceutical which has a new cancer cure. Bob is an immunologist and very familiar with the efficacy of Acme’s new breakthrough drug. Bob places an order for $10,000 worth of Acme and his broker informs him that he could actually buy $20,000 worth of Acme if he would just open up a margin account. Bob may not be able to afford to lose $20,000 half of which is borrowed but knowing of the potential for the new drug he takes the bait and opens up a margin a/c and buys $20,000 worth of Acme. Bob can afford to buy “X” amount of Acme but he ends up buying “2X” worth but it was his choice. After all, to an immunologist like Bob Acme’s chances for an FDA approval is a no-brainer.

Bob’s brokerage firm’s clearing firm earns a fee for the “banking” business it provided to Bob and the full “2X” amount of shares serves as the collateral for that $10,000 loan. Bob’s brokerage firm incurs veritably no risk for default on this loan with 200% collateral because they can easily sell these shares out from underneath Bob should the price drop. Let’s assume that the shares that Bob bought were short sold from a short seller. This “2X” amount of shares were originally bought by an investor across town named “Buyer Bob A.” They too were bought in a margin a/c; that’s why they were available for lending to the short seller.

After processing Bob B.’s $20,000 purchase order his broker now becomes the “legal owner” of that particular parcel of 2X amount of shares unknowingly “co-beneficially owned” by Bob A. and Bob B. Being the new “legal owner” of that 2X parcel of Acme shares Bob B.’s broker has all of the right in the world to rent them to yet another short seller who then sells them to yet another Bob, “Buyer Bob C.” There are now 3 “co-beneficial owners” of that one parcel of impossible to identify shares. The most recent purchaser is referred to as the “legal owner” and all previous purchasers of that same parcel of shares are referred to as “security entitlement holders”. This parcel of shares is impossible to identify because of the NSCC’s insistence on holding “street name” shares in an “anonymously pooled” format and because of the circa 1970 “dematerialization” of tough to counterfeit paper-certificated shares into easy to counterfeit electronic book entry shares.

The new “legal owner” receives the right to vote these shares as voting rights are directly tied to “legal ownership”. The 11 “security entitlement holders” lost their voting rights but they don’t know this because they’re impossible to identify and inform. Isn’t that fortunate! During any voting procedure the clearing firm will typically and invisibly shave down voting rights on a pro-rata basis to help cover up these frauds and cover up the existence of their hiding FTDs in “ex-clearing arrangements”. One must recall that a mere “security entitlement” has none of the rights that this “package of rights” known as a “share” has. Every time the purchaser of nonexistent shares (a “security entitlement holder”) whose shares remain undelivered tries to exercise one of the approximately 12 rights attached only to legitimate registered shares a cover up fraud needs to be perpetrated to cover up the disparity between legitimate “shares outstanding” and the arithmetic sum of “shares outstanding” and “security entitlements held”.

The facts of this case can easily be ascertained, and demonstrate that the Spanish government and the SEC have completely overlooked what may be one of history’s largest cases of both insider trading and blatant share price manipulation via the illegal naked shorting of a NASDAQ-listed company and the hedge fund-instigated closure of its parent company in Spain.

My name is Maria de los Milagros (Mila) Hernán Alvarez, and I am a resident of Madrid, Spain. I am writing this exposé to advise your readers of the true circumstances involving a USA based hedge fund’s successful attempt to destroy a respected Spanish company, thereby manipulating the share price of then-NASDAQ listed Escala Group (ESCL) sharply downward.

On May 9, 2006, 300 riot police shut down Afinsa Bienes Tangibles’ headquarters building in Madrid. The prosecutor’s allegations were that Afinsa was a massive Ponzi scheme. Today, more than 3½ years later, no tangible proof of any wrongdoing has been provided by the prosecutor, and not one trial of any Afinsa executive has taken place. In fact, after a year-plus worldwide search the prosecutor found no illegal offshore monies and, contrary to what the prosecutor anticipated, found every client’s investment account to be intact in the company’s massive walk-in vaults. In addition, Afinsa had honored every commitment to all of its clients, including my family.

Unlike any Ponzi operation, throughout its 26-year history Afinsa’s financial statements were fully available to the public per Spanish regulations. Over this long period of time Afinsa built the world’s largest orderly philatelic marketplace, both buying and selling worldwide stamps to investors. The main charge of the Spanish prosecutor was that Afinsa operated as a financial company and not mercantile as Afinsa claimed. This charge was recently overturned by the government itself, by the Consejo de Estado and Banco de España’s own admission. Only the judge and prosecutor are still trying this charge, despite the fact that other government officials have disavowed it.

According to Neil Martin, a Barron’s writer, Afinsa’s closure was precipitated by a hedge fund’s (Georgia-based Kingsford Capital) complaints to the Spanish government in September of 2005. In a May 2005 Barron’s article authored by Martin, he openly admits to working with and being partially financed by a hedge fund short Escala shares since the previous summer. It was apparent in 2005, despite Martin’s frequent and incredibly slanted Barron’s articles against Escala, as well as his collaboration with other reporters to further his campaign, that accurate independent analysis and the company’s positive results were overcoming the dirty campaign orchestrated by Martin and Louis Corrigan of Kingsford Capital.

Therefore, if a way to knock down Escala’s share price was not found soon, it was apparent that many millions of dollars would be lost by those shorting Escala stock, both legally and illegally. Afinsa was the majority owner (69%) of Escala and their largest client, a perfect target to launch a smear campaign against. Brazenly, with this as seemingly a last resort, Corrigan submitted his fallacious complaint against Afinsa and struck it rich. Despite the fact that Afinsa had 1.1 billion Euros in equity written to market beyond the clients’ stamp portfolio values, the prosecutor apparently acted on Corrigan’s complaint and put tens of thousands of clients into total limbo, as well as causing 3,500 Afinsa workers to lose their employment.

Far from being a Ponzi scheme, Afinsa’s exact stamp-related business model is currently in place at Stanley Gibbons, a well respected 150-plus year old company based in England. No one has called Stanley Gibbons a Ponzi scheme. In addition, after due diligence in March of 2006, Citigroup’s investment banking office in Spain made a presentation to Afinsa for an IPO, valuing the company in excess of 1.2 billion Euros if Afinsa were to go public. As another result of the closure, the founders of Afinsa are suing the Spanish government for 1.4 billion Euros.

To date, the SEC has apparently done nothing to investigate the massive, tens of millions of shares of Escala stock traded illegally in May and December of 2006. Nor has any apparent effort been made to investigate the extreme likelihood of equally massive insider trading if the “complaining” hedge funds had insider knowledge of the Spanish prosecutor’s plan to close down Afinsa.

The complete facts of this unprecedented story can be viewed at the website http://www.gregmanning.me A copy of the Kingsford Capital complaint against Afinsa is present on that website as Exhibit 4, as well as Exhibit A, an independent research report on the massive share price manipulation which includes DTC records and proof of the significant illegal trading.

Here in Spain I am leading a petition drive to have the European Union put pressure on the president of Spain, José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, to address the crisis situation created by the government for 190,000 persons. I would welcome anyone who sympathizes with our plight to sign the international petition at http://www.gopetition.com/online/32742.html. Thank you for your assistance.

Based on my research and after reviewing the Deep Capture website, the attacks against Escala and Afinsa were the same modus operandi used against many, many companies. The difference in this case is that not only shareholders, but 190,000 additional innocent victims have lost all or part of their life savings. It’s time that the SEC takes action on behalf of undoubtedly millions of victims of illegal share price manipulation of all the companies affected by these well-planned corporate terror campaigns.

I am warming up to the chairman of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. He wants to question former FED Chairman Alan Greenspan, the person who was guided by the principle that FRAUD in the Banking Industry should NOT be Regulated!!! AND also the FBI, the Fed, the Department of Justice! I can’t wait to see this!…..

“WASHINGTON–The chairman of the commission investigating the 2008 financial crisis said Thursday he planned to probe the actions of regulators back to the Clinton Administration, broadening his inquiry beyond bankers.

Former California Treasurer Phil Angelides said in an interview he wanted to know “what did the FBI, the Fed, the Department of Justice and others know about subprime lending; when they know it, and why didn’t they act?”

Mr. Angelides said former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and current Chairman Ben Bernanke likely would be called to testify at future commission hearings. He also mentioned former Securities and Exchange Commission heads Christopher Cox, William Donaldson and Arthur Levitt as likely witnesses….”

fyi
scroll to the third video found in the recent publication of the yale school of managementhttp://qn.som.yale.edu/article.php?issue_id=12&article_id=274
“Regulation
Chanos talks about the regulatory issues facing hedge funds. He touches on naked shorting, the uptick rule, and the need for a regulatory body for financial markets that doesn’t have the institutional myopia of the existing mechanisms.”
also see the article where i found the link:
“Were you born a short-seller? Yale Interviews James Chanos
dated Jan. 21, 2010http://www.gurufocus.com/news.php?id=82296

Oh my goodness! Awesome article dude! Thank you, However I
am having problems with your RSS. I don’t understand why I can’t subscribe to
it. Is there anybody else having the same RSS issues?
Anyone that knows the answer will you kindly respond? Thanks!!